Skip to content
Wheels Global Foundation at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Wheels Global Foundation

The Foundation has been organized to operate for charitable, educational purposes and promoting social welfare globally.

$399k
Granted FY2021
5
Grants FY2021
4
States reached
$149k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0192% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2021.

Education$163kHealth$89kInternational$82kPhilanthropy$58kScience & Tech$41kReligion$21kEnvironment$15kCommunity Improvement$4kOther$0
02FY2021 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 5 grants below total $279,759, the rows itemized in this filing. The $398,831 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $119,072 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2021

  • Under $10k1 grant · $587
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $41k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $238k
$31,478
Median grant
4
States reached
$690k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
IIT Delhi Excellence Foundation$148,976
Evolko Systems Inc$88,718
Sevak Foundation$31,478
New York University School$10,000
PAN IIT Inc$587
02The need
03

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

show:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–21) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 50% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

area typical 9%Bombay Heritage Foundation: $40k → 8%IIT Delhi Excellence Foundation: $149k → 10%New York University School: $10k → 17%PAN IIT Inc: $587 → 8%Pratham -2nd Chance Program: $3k → 16%Vicente Ferrer Foundation: $9k → 14%The UNN Corporation: $520 → 11%Global Pragathi: $20k → 14%Kolkata Foundation: $4k → 11%Sevak Foundation: $31k → 6%Charity Aid Foundation: $22k → 9%EduGirls: $3k → 8%IIT Bombay Heritage Fund: $9k → 8%Sevak Foundation Inc: $15k → 6%IIT B - PCs for students: $1k → 8%Sevak Foundation Inc: $15k → 6%Evolko Systems Inc: $89k → 8%Sevak Foundation: $12k → 6%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
How this is measured
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP.

Which US states its grants reach

NY
OH
NJ
CA
VA
MD
DC
TX
FL

Grants abroad, by region: $303k on the FY2024 return

Schedule F, as filed: 1 region. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

South Asia$303k · 100% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: Education, Clean Drinking Water

How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s giving. Grants abroad on Schedule F are filed by region, purpose and amount with no recipient name, so they are shown by region and cannot be placed on the country map or matched to a grantee.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

32%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$154k · 3 repeat orgs$333k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +555% since the first grant, against +82% for those funded once.

3 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2021, 2 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2021 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

3
12

Total granted

$154k
$85k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+555%
+82%

Still filing today

67%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2021, 11% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $248k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21
RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

’17’18’19’20’21
InternationalPhilanthropyEducationFood & NutritionOther
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). The earliest year is left-censored: relationships that predate the data read as new. Theme is the grantee’s IRS cause.

Backed again, and grew

  • SF
    SEVAK FOUNDATION INC
    4× · 2017–2021 · $73k · revenue +353% · 34% of their budget
  • IB
    IIT Bombay Heritage Foundation
    2× · 2017–2020 · $41k · revenue +555%
  • CA
    Charity Aid Foundation
    2× · 2017–2018 · $40k

Funded once

  • P
    PUKAR
    one grant, 2018 · $21k
  • GP
    GLOBAL PRAGATHI INCgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $20k · revenue ×15 · 40% of their budget
  • VF
    Vicente Ferrer Foundation USA Incgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $9k · revenue +66%
How this is measured

Repeat means funded in two or more distinct years. Growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Its field

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
Sahayog Foundation
Community Improvement
2
Motwani Jadeja Global Foundation
Philanthropy
3
Vattikuti India Relief Foundation
Philanthropy
4
Satyagraha Foundation
Religion
5
Shraman Foundation
Arts & Culture
6
Samjivani Foundation
Philanthropy
7
Vidya Girls Education Foundation
Education
8
Annapurna Global Foundation
Philanthropy
9
Rukhsana Tahirkheli Foundation
Philanthropy
10
Ravi and Naina Patel Foundation
Philanthropy
11
Simha Foundation
Philanthropy
12
Shubham Foundation

To support education based organizations

Arts & Culture
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Vicente Ferrer Foundation Usa Inc; the most unlike its peers is Whiteman 4G Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
04the grantee network

9 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 9 of the 19 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

3
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
6
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/9
Grantees still filing
7/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Evolko Systems Inc: $88,718 · OtherEvolko Systems IncCharity Aid Foundation: $39,575 · OtherCharity Aid FoundationPUKAR: $20,975 · OtherPUKARNew York University School: $10,000 · OtherNew York University SchoolVicente Ferrer Foundation USA Inc: $9,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $8,000 · Other+5 more: $9,663 · OtherIIT Delhi Excellence Foundation Inc: $148,976 · EducationIIT Delhi Excellence Foundation In…SEVAK FOUNDATION INC: $73,137 · InternationalSEVAK FOUNDATION INCIIT Bombay Heritage Foundation: $41,000 · InternationalIIT Bombay Heritage Foundati…+2 more: $6,500 · International+2 moreGLOBAL PRAGATHI INC: $19,500 · Food & NutritionWhiteman 4G Foundation: $9,000 · PhilanthropyPRATHAM USA: $3,000 · Philanthropy
Other$185,931Education$148,976International$120,637Food & Nutrition$19,500Philanthropy$12,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetIIT Delhi Excellence Foundation Inc: $148,976 over 1y, 30% of budgetSEVAK FOUNDATION INC: $73,137 over 4y, 34% of budgetIIT Bombay Heritage Foundation: $41,000 over 2y, 2.3% of budgetGLOBAL PRAGATHI INC: $19,500 over 1y, 40% of budgetVicente Ferrer Foundation USA Inc: $9,000 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetWhiteman 4G Foundation: $9,000 over 1y, 11% of budgetKOLKATA FOUNDATION INC: $3,500 over 1y, 1.7% of budgetEDU-GIRLS INC: $3,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetPRATHAM USA: $3,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budget
Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

  • Who funds IIT Delhi Excellence Foundation Inc ↗
  • Who funds SEVAK FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds IIT Bombay Heritage Foundation ↗
  • Who funds GLOBAL PRAGATHI INC ↗
  • Who funds Vicente Ferrer Foundation USA Inc ↗
  • Who funds Whiteman 4G Foundation ↗
  • Who funds KOLKATA FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds EDU-GIRLS INC ↗
  • Who funds PRATHAM USA ↗

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

The Pfizer Foundation…Morgan Stanley Global…Paypal Charitable Giv…American Online Givin…The Bank of America C…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
The Pfizer Foundation IncNY12.1× affinity5 shared granteesties to 7 of 7Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Pfizer Foundation Inc · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Wheels Global Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Wheels Global Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%3%10%23%40%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    2get no government money at all
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%
    typical government reliance, FY20–25
    How this is measured
    Government income is each org’s traced federal awards (USASpending grants and contracts) plus state payments (open checkbooks) as a share of its total revenue (IRS Form 990); the self-reported government-grant line (990 line 1e) is carried for cross-check: a grantee that reports government grants we could not trace to a source is left off the chart rather than shown as receiving none. An association, not a claim that a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than a census; state records exist for 9 states, so a grantee outside them shows no state figure (dimmed) rather than a false zero. Federal award amounts are obligations, which can span years, so a single-year share is indicative. 990 filings lag 12 to 24 months.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Wheels Global Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Wheels Global Foundation through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.

    Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 19 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

    How this is measured
    Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its return. Official is another government record about an organization, such as a federal award or a charity register, joined by name where no shared identifier exists. Resolved is an identity we worked out where the filing named a recipient without an EIN, kept only above a measured confidence threshold. Computed is arithmetic over those, like themes, portfolio clusters and co-funder strength. Context is a statistic about a place rather than about an organization, which is what the need overlay is: it describes the area a grantee’s address sits in, not where its work lands. Inferred is drawn by a model from text, like the partnerships read out of public news and organization websites. Each is labeled where it appears.

    Generated from the IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2021, released 2021. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2024) is on record and reports $303k of grant expense, but none of it to a named recipient. On a Form 990 that can mean grants abroad, filed by region only (Schedule F), grants under $5,000, which are not itemized, or a schedule referenced as an attachment the e-file does not carry. The figures above are therefore from FY2021, the most recent year this funder named its grantees.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Wheels Global’s filings →

    More from the funding graph

    The unnamed billions
    grants reported with no recipient in the public record
    The regranting layer
    51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
    The DAF merry-go-round
    $9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
    The endowment market
    who holds foundation money, and what just moved
    The camps
    funders cluster by geography, not ideology
    By state
    where grant money is based, and what stays home